No, if you read back, you will understand. Well i hope you would, but considering the level of deliberate stupidity you have shown before i dont hold out much hope.

Only the ones who go on to play for SL clubs on a regular basis , the others that dont aren't SL players , thats why they end up back in the Championships

What % of juniors that play Scholarship and academy at SL clubs go on to have genuine SL careers ? , it isn't the fault of Championship clubs that SL clubs cannot make the best juniors into SL players , the Championship clubs have to make do with 3/4/5 th best to produce their players without the ' facilities '

that SL clubs have available , like grass , balls and cones

So you in all your wisdom doesn't know a better way , but you want the encumbants at Red Hall to find one for you , sorry you've lost the argument

Your deliberate confusion is boring. You see had you actually read the conversation between myself and rupert bear instead of jumping in with both feet, trying to score points, you wouldnt look like such a silly old man.

Lets take it in baby steps for you

Lets put an end to it before your deliberate confusion to hide your idiocy derails another thread.

I didnt suggest there was a better way, didnt suggest i knew of a better way, didnt suggest i expected red hall to go and find a better way, simply refuted a direct statement saying I would only be in favour of SC changes which benefited expansion sides by saying i would also be in favour of changes which which made the SC work better for heartland sides.

and that's the end of that one..

And who do they, by and large, go on to play for in the championships? Is it the local heartland clubs by any chance? That doesnt sound like a bad thing for the local championship clubs, it seems like an advantage for them

except they dont, a huge amount of players in the championships are players that have come from SL academies, that is the advantage a club like Leigh gets, a decent youngster gets picked up by a local SL club, goes through an SL academy, with SL coaches, SL nutrionists and SL sports scientists playing at a higher level, with and against better players, and as such, even those who come back down to championship level are better players than they would otherwise would be, and clubs Leigh are at an advantage when looking to sign them for no other reason than their location.

we can but hope.

No, I don't. THe Crusaders suffered form all those issues. They could have been "saved" if their backer had been who he was argued to be but he wasn't.



You must have been avoiding forums for the last four years then because I certainly did say that and I was far from the only person. Even people with no interest in RL e.g. ex-Warriors fans were saying that. The mailbags of all the trade papers and mags were full of people saying this. How you could not have noticed I don't know.



Not at all. The RFL chose to be bloody stupid. Very many fans chose to blindly follow the RFL but many others could see exactly where it would end up.



My post does not imply anything of the sort. It is common sense that a club that requires £2 million a year injected into it is less sustainable than one that requires £500k. Both would be screwed without backers but one will find it easier to find a backer. Anyone with half a brain can see this.



There was, any Wrexham FC fan would have told you the same (and they did make this point on Totalrl.com at the time).

Wrexham Crusaders had little in common with Celtic Crusaders. Moss merely bought the SL licence that Samuel had been given by the RFL for free. Crusaders had no assetts.

If they dont have it, they don't spend it. It really is as simple as that. I havent once suggested they should be forced to spend the money, or that they should spend it if they dont have it. Simply that if it is available, they are allowed to spend it.

If they don't have it, they will spend it anyway. That's the lesson of rugby league management since the 1960s and why the salary cap was brought in for the lower leagues. Crusaders are a perfect example of why this rule needs to be enforced for expansion clubs as well as heartlands ones; nobody forced them to spend more than they could afford but they did so anyway.

The cap should be a percentage of revenue or even take into account available funds from outside but it should still exist otherwise we'll go to the era of clubs spending 95% of revenue on player wages and selling their grounds to make up their losses.

But it is not simple, most businesses base and governments base their growth and often existence and governance on money they do not currently have. Capital debt markets would cease to exist if this were not true.

If they do not have the money available how can they spend it?

yet Crusaders, like Wakefield, like Widnes and countless others before them went bust whilst operating under a salary cap system. The SC has proven a very very poor tool for stopping clubs going bust, it hasnt, and wont, stop clubs spending more than they can afford. Regardless of having an SC or not we need to trust clubs, whether they be Leigh, Halifax, SWS, or Northampton to be run viably and sustainably. We shouldnt be letting Northampton in if we believe the people running the club wont run it sustainably, the SC isnt set at a level which means sustainability for Northampton, the SC is an absolutely arbitrary amount to Northampton, sticking to the current SC wont make them viable, giving them a £70k allowance over it wont stop them being viable.

Its a strange comparison to draw, the capital debt markets and government debt with a prospective semi-pro RL club?They dont.

They do. Explain Crusaders downfall without refering to them spending more money than they had coming in.

Crusaders broke the salary cap. No use blaming the cap for their problems when everybody knew that the RFL was turning a blind eye to their breeches.

As I understand Wakey had image rights problems that weren't predictable. Don't really understand the ins and outs of Widnes' issues but removing the % of total revenue criteria was a bad mistake.

Sticking an extra 70k allowance onto Northampton doesn't mean that the club will have an extra 70k to spend. You could give them an extra million allowance but it would be meaningless since they wouldn't have the cash to spend.

One word - credit. You can run a business on thin air. You just can't do it for ever because one day the credit will run out.

Only when you explain how the salary cap stopped the Crusaders going bust.

Not in SL they didnt, they didnt even spend close to the SL Salary Cap yet went bust. The salary Cap doesnt stop clubs going bust.
Wakefield had many many problems, all of which were predictable, and Widnes spent more than they had to try and gain promotion, but did it in an SC era.

I dont disagree, if they dont have it, they dont spend it. If they do have it, they can spend it. If Northampton cant afford to spend £366k (the Championship Salary cap plus an allowance) they shouldnt spend it, if they cant afford to spend £300k (the championship Salary Cap) they shouldnt spend it.

No, I'm pretty sure they wore shorts like everyone else

All clubs suffer from those issues. All clubs have varying levels of shortfall that need to be made up by their backer, Crusaders' required a large investment but so do many other clubs such as Huddersfield. The fact that Crusaders lost money isn't unique to them, you seem desperate to want to disagree with me but you fundamentally are.
No, I can't ever remember it being raised on this forum that the biggest flaw in the club would be that Samuel would pull out after one season in SL. If that was claimed, it was a minor point and likely a clutch at straws by people who were bitter about Crusaders' inclusion for other reasons. As I said, something like that is a random variable and there is no possible way that you could accurately claim that you knew it was going to happen. I could quite easily state that Steve O'Connor will pull out of Widnes or something equivalent, that doesn't mean that I deserve any credit if it actually happens. With hindsight, Samuel clearly wasn't a trustworthy character, I've already stated that the RFL failed by not determining this at the time. However, as I said, there's absolutely no way that you, the RFL or anyone else could have known for certain what was going to happen unless are claiming to be psychic.
Yet Crusaders were able to find a backer who rescued the club, so this argument is completely irrelevant. No question that Crusaders would have been a more attractive prospect if they were a stronger club, but they were a new team in only their fourth season, any club at that stage is going to require more investment than a club that has been going for 100+ years. The opinion of Wrexham FC fans is hardly the most valid source. Clearly they were right, but what option did the RFL have? Moss and Roberts were willing to take on the debt, the fact that they were hundreds of miles away is irrelevant, they were still a backer that saved the club which would otherwise have ceased to exist.

I'd imagine that the new NW Crusaders, with a friendly landlord in the uni and a friendly supporter-run football club alongside them, will prove a success.

But as for Northampton- there must be loads of frustrated lads out there who will never make the top-grade in the major local sport (i.e. union) who are hungry for the challenge. Here's hoping.

Have they started to assemble a squad yet?.The last i heard the team was made up of supporters.

IIRC when SWS set up they had open days for RU players to come down and try there luck,i think a few players were signed on on the back of these trials.Hopefully northampton will do the same.

To those who keep banging on about the SC,the hierarchy at northampton have stated that they may put money into it to get it up and running,but after that, it needs to be self sufficient,so lets hope the area backs it.

That is half decent attempt at putting together a level playing field for new clubs , but it is still completely subjective and open to abuse , which club do you use to set the level ?, which year do you do it ?, because the number of ex SL players changes all the time , and all the numbers are arbitray at best

Maybe HKR should have had 5 years extra quota and SC allowance to get them up to SL speed , but you haven't argued their case have you ?

No matter what formula you devise it will favour some clubs and discriminate against others , it isn't possible to balance it out

So saying " If the SC rules were re jigged " isnt suggesting a better way ?

So you are talking broken biscuits then ? , fair enough

Outstanding contribution to the debate from your good self once again , you should be so proud